The whole issue of recycling has been clouded by green ideology. The EU set it targets for increasing recycling back in 1999 without properly questioning whether that is always the best way of disposing of rubbish... Recycling your plastic bottles may make you glow with virtue, but if they have to be carted halfway around the world to be recycled, and then large quantities of energy are consumed in the recyling process, it is far from obvious that you are doing the planet a good turn.

Alternatively, your plastic bottle could be burnt in a power station, its stored energy used to generate electricity that would otherwise require fossil fuels, and the waste heat distributed to local public buildings and homes. This is exactly what happens in the case of the Eastcroft combined heat and power plant, which has been consuming nearly a third of Nottinghamshires waste since it opened in 1973. Further development on waste incinerators in Britain has stalled, however, thanks to the assumption that waste must be recycled at all costs.

In a retrospective attempt to justify the policy on recycling, ... recently asked the Technical University of Denmark to undertake a review of worldwide research on the debate between recycling and incineration and their respective contributions towards greenhouse gas emissions. The review has been quoted by green groups wanting to debunk the myth that recycling isnt all it is cracked up to be. But it fails to debunk anything. Of 37 studies into the issue of paper recycling, for example, six arrived at the conclusion that paper is better incinerated than recycled, and nine indicated it makes little difference environmentally either way. Of 42 studies into plastic recycling, eight concluded that plastic is better incinerated and two said there was little difference.

For the most part, recycling doesn't do anything but assuage the environmentalists self-imposed guilt... It is good to see that someone like this author has the guts to point this out (Watch your back Ross)... With reports like this from Denmark Tech, maybe we can begin to make better, more responsible waste policies...

I have been trying to provide critical judgment to my daughters (8 and 11) about the environment. I will read them this article. The teachers and science material beat the recycling drum hard. The average citizen equates recycling and good. The lack of critical thinking on recycling and other environmental matters is shocking. The lack of critical thinking relates to the central purpose of environmentalism: thinking that you are doing something positive.

On the monetary side ... I read that residential recycling costs more to implement and keep going than earning potential. It is only the recycling from commercial businesses that such endeavors break even or shows a modest profit.

With current technology, the rest of it is done to make greens happy and companies look concerned.

Although, there was an interesting article in Pop Sci this month about a device that used microwaves to recover petroleum products from things like tires and plastics. Basically, it's just gasification. Technically, it's not recyling, but it's better than putting them in a landfill - might be interesting to see if landfills could be mined? Per the article, it was an energy efficient process, as well.

Not merely burned to generate electricity, but just about totally annihilated, as in plasma conversion of the trash stream:

popsci.com/popsci/science/873aae7bf86c0110vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd/

The end products are a fuel (syngas, a mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen) for powering an electric generation station, or other industrial use, and a glassy slag. One of the by-products is a huge heat generation point, which is in itself a potential power generation opportunity. And all with no residual radioactivity or storage problems with the slag, which may be recycled as aggregate for concrete or roadbuilding material, or which is actually a fairly high-quality ore for further processing to extract the various metallic elements. The process does emit carbon dioxide as an end product, but there is no conflict there - the CO2 supports the process of photosynthesis in growing plants, with the by-product being free oxygen, something that people use every every moment of their lives. Plus the carbohydrates formed, which provide enormous amounts of the very diet of these same people that are breathing up all the oxygen the plants are producing in daylight hours.

14
posted on 11/30/2007 11:40:37 AM PST
by alloysteel
(Ignorance is no handicap for some people in a debate. They just get more shrill.)

Suggestion:
Give your daughters a project. In my area, they are advertising that we should take our lithium batteries to a recycling center for “recycling”. I would bet that the “recycling” consists of sending the batteries to a hazardous waste facility, not really recycling.

I would bet your 11 yo daughter could really find out where they go.

.....Bob

16
posted on 11/30/2007 11:43:49 AM PST
by Lokibob
(Some people are like slinkys. Useless, but if you throw them down the stairs, you smile.)

I immediately got out the power saw and cut the bin into smaller pieces and put the pieces into the neighbors nice new maroon bin.

That was a waste - those bins are the perfect size for storing various shed items. If they have drainage holes, you can use them to cover plants to protect them from bad weather. I'm using mine to hold garden edging, bags of bird seed and small tools.

For me there is one really good impact from this whole re-cycling nonsense.

Out here on the Left Coast we have one trash barrel for trash, one for recyclables and one for gardening trash. Three trucks come and pick these up once a week. All three go to the same dump site and all three dump their stuff in one big pile.

The Republicans put anything they want in any trash can. The Democrats carefully sort theirs into the three bins in order to make themselves feel good about how they are helping Al Gore.

I’m sure tires are included. But the article I (dimly) remember reading, was limited to “household waste” items of the sort we citizens routinely are hectored to recycle, as opposed to bigger items like tires and steel scrap.

Mine are the perfect size to use as snow molds for the snow forts I have built for my kids over the last few years. Since they are tapered, the snow comes right out as one big solid chunk every time. Stacking the blocks three or four high is no big deal. I hope it snows enough this year to put them to good use.

I’ve often wondered especially at the times Politicians tout more controls of emissions as in increasing restrictions on Automotive, Electrical Power Generation, etc. whatever did the initial steps of the ‘50’s, ‘60’s and since truly accomplish? I notice no difference in the air quality for the Billions of dollars in fines, fee’s, and costs perpetrated upon industry in the Los Angeles area, nor here in Riverside. The air quality isn’t seemingly that much better if at all.

Seems we are upfront constantly with what we should do Politically for cleaning up our fragile environment, but never seem to receive information regarding the effectiveness of such efforts.

21
posted on 11/30/2007 12:04:16 PM PST
by rockinqsranch
(Dems, Libs, Socialists...call 'em what you will...They ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)

-don’t have a shed and the carport is about as organized as a library with the Dewey decimal system -live in South Florida...not much need to cover the plants -served as a good protest statement to the city. -I hate clutter...don’t “save” stuff...My motto is; “throw it away/give it away/put it away”...learned that from messies anonymous

Old tires are finding many good and very commercially valid (economic) uses (price of products sold are greater than cost of collection, production, marketing and overhead).

I always thought glass was easy and economic to recycle (apply enough heat and it’s no longer a solid again and can be merged and divided again into new shapes in as good a quality as originally), whereas good glass must first obtain reasonably pure source material (sand). Am I wrong in thinking recycled glass is not economical?

I refuse to recycle. I wont work for a recycling company without getting paid.

My sentiments exactly. Our disposal service will deliver nice clean recycling tubs every once in a while. The next door neighbors keep stealing ours which makes me laugh because my husband and I don't recycle. We live in the SW suburbs of Chicago so I think Waste Management has to pick through all of the recycling and garbage to look for bodies.

25
posted on 11/30/2007 12:29:31 PM PST
by Rollee
("Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But I repeat myself." M.Twain)

I am for the bottle bills because it gives hobos something to do and some way to make some money.

Maine passed a bottle bill while I was living there. The difference in the amount of roadside litter was like night and day, within a year or two. I guess that if people don't toss their bottles out the window, they don't toss McD's litter, etc etc. I dunno why, but there honestly *was* a difference.

Then, since putting a 5c deposit on cans and beer bottles was a good idea, the state legislature put deposits on $#%#$^@^ near everything that held a substance of some sort. Turned a decent, reasonable program into a royal PITA.

For all the feel good, money burning recycling programs liberals create, I do agree with the bottle deposit law we have here in Iowa. Not that I would care if people just threw away all their containers, that would be just fine if it always happened, but people litter, and glass bottles get broken, and are dangerous, very sharp and broken glass never gets dull. And since people still litter, kids and homeless are employed to clean up at least some of the glass. I wish they would raise the deposit on all glass beverage bottles to 50¢.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.